RESUMEN
Aim: Reporting toxicities of targeted therapies (TTs) and immunotherapy in oncology requires special attention. Materials & methods: We identified TTs and immunotherapies approved by the US FDA for solid malignancies in the adult population. Publications were reviewed according to a 24-point score based on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidance. Results: We identified 81 trials (>45,000 patients). The experimental drug was studied as single agent in 51% of the cases; setting of disease was mainly (95%) advanced/metastatic. Lowest scores in adverse event (AE) description regarded: reporting recurrent/late toxicities and duration of the AEs (>90%), time of occurrence and indication of all-grade AEs (>75%). Conclusion: Suboptimal reporting of AEs in trials leading to approval of TTs and immunotherapy was shown. Improving AE descriptions should be a priority in ongoing trials.
Asunto(s)
Terapia Molecular Dirigida/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Humanos , Inmunoterapia/efectos adversos , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Terapia Molecular Dirigida/métodos , Neoplasias/etiología , Neoplasias/metabolismo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the impact of center expertise, in terms of number of patients treated, on the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis including data from 6 randomized trials in head and neck SCC conducted in Italy. We evaluated the association between OS or PFS and the number of patients recruited by the center. RESULTS: The outcome of 903 patients who had received radiotherapy (RT) was analyzed (median follow-up 76 months). The hazard ratio (HR) comparing the third and the first quartiles of the distribution of number of patients per center showed an advantage in PFS (HR 0.59, range 0.53-0.65, P < .0001) and in OS (HR 0.70, 0.60-0.81, P < .0001) for centers with a higher number of patients recruited. A similar benefit was observed in PFS (HR 0.63, 0.60-0.66) and OS (HR 0.74, 0.69-0.79) considering the mean number of patients per year. CONCLUSIONS: The PFS and OS were longer for patients treated in high-case-volume centers.
